Rebel News Podcast - SHEILA GUNN REID ｜ How long until the Conservative Party leadership candidates flip-flop on climate policy？

00:00:00.000 Oh, hey, Rebels. What's going on? It's me, your host, Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you are listening

00:00:05.280 to a free audio-only version of my weekly Wednesday night show, The Gunn Show. But this

00:00:10.900 is the internet. And the beauty of the internet is that you can listen or watch whatever you

00:00:16.420 choose because we're not tied to old-fashioned terrestrial radio or TV. It's free here on

00:00:23.780 the internet, at least for now, until Justin Trudeau passes those internet censorship and

00:00:28.820 control laws. Now, tonight, my guest is Tom Harris from the International Climate Science

00:00:34.040 Coalition, and we are talking about the climate policies of the respective Conservative Party

00:00:39.780 leadership candidates. You guys know this is something that I pay very close attention to

00:00:43.980 because climate policy robs your family of expendable income and does little to help the environment.

00:00:53.520 Actually, nothing to help the environment whatsoever. I'm a conservationist, not an

00:00:58.280 environmentalist. Now, if you like listening to the show, then I promise you're going to love

00:01:01.320 watching it. But in order to watch, you need to be a subscriber to Rebel News+. That's what we call

00:01:05.700 our long-form TV-style shows here on Rebel News. Subscribers get access to my show, which I think

00:01:10.840 is worth the price of admission, and I put a lot of work into it. But you also get access to Ezra's

00:01:16.140 Nightly Ezra Levant show, David Menzies' fun Friday night show Rebel Roundup, Kat and Nat's new show

00:01:22.800 Misunderstood, and Andrew Chapados' show, Andrew Says. It's only $8 a month to subscribe. We added

00:01:29.640 two new shows and never raised the price of a subscription. That's Rebel News, helping your

00:01:36.480 family fight inflation. And just for our podcast listeners, you can save an extra 10% on a new

00:01:42.080 Rebel News Plus subscription by using the coupon code PODCAST. When you subscribe, just go to

00:01:47.780 rebelnewsplus.com to become a member today. And now please enjoy this free audio-only version of

00:01:55.740 my show. Actually, before you do that, can I ask you to do something else for me? Can you leave a

00:02:01.180 five-star review wherever you're listening to us, whatever podcast platform you find us on?

00:02:07.100 It helps other people find the show. It puts us higher in the algorithm, but it also helps us beat

00:02:14.240 CBC Podcasts in the ranking. And that's kind of important to me because they have a ton of our

00:02:20.580 money to take on smaller networks like ours. Now, please enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.

00:02:29.520 So joining me now from his home in Ottawa is good friend of the show, Tom Harris from the

00:02:48.160 International Climate Science Coalition Canada. And I knew he would be the exact guy I needed to

00:02:53.860 talk to when it comes to the Conservative Party, the Conservative Party leadership race and climate

00:03:00.940 policy. And Tom did some pretty intensive research for the show about the history of Conservative

00:03:08.280 politicians and I guess flip-flopping on climate policy. Tell us what you know, Tom, or at least a

00:03:14.200 little bit. You know a lot, but on this thing. Yeah, it really goes back to Bob Mills. I was the

00:03:19.820 legislative assistant for Bob Mills in 2002. And I learned a lot because, of course, that's when

00:03:25.200 Kyoto was being debated in the House of Commons. And Bob was originally against the climate scare. In

00:03:32.260 fact, he did some really excellent work. He did the filibuster speech, 12 hours of speaking to try to

00:03:38.440 stop Kyoto. So, I mean, he was very definitely on that side, but he switched. He changed sides. And if you

00:03:45.540 look at recent history, you see that happening over and over and over. I mean, Stephen Harper, and this

00:03:50.640 is something the Conservative candidates have to realize, just before he was a leader or he was

00:03:56.440 elected leader of the Canadian Alliance, he was against the climate scare. In fact, you might remember

00:04:02.060 he called Kyoto a money-sucking socialist scheme. He wasn't wrong. Tom, we got to put that on a t-shirt.

00:04:10.420 Exactly. And yet, it wasn't long after he became Prime Minister that he actually started to support

00:04:16.880 the climate scare, you know, and supporting the Paris Agreement and all that sort of thing.

00:04:21.800 Now, more recently, we see Andrew Scheer. And I did a little research before 2017, when the Liberals

00:04:30.460 introduced a bill to or a motion to reaffirm Parliament's support of the Paris Agreement.

00:04:36.760 Because you remember, that was when Donald Trump announced they were going to withdraw from the

00:04:41.540 Paris Agreement in the United States. So, the Liberals introduced a motion to reaffirm our

00:04:46.360 commitment. And it's interesting because before the vote, actually 2016, before he was actually elected

00:04:53.920 as leader of the Canadian Conservative Party, Andrew Scheer voted against ratification of the Paris

00:05:01.360 Accord, Paris Agreement. And he was elected leader then in May 2017. Less than a month later, on June 2nd,

00:05:11.200 2017, he voted in support of the Liberals' motion to reaffirm the Paris Agreement.

00:05:19.040 And, Tom, sorry to interrupt you, and he whipped that vote. So, he didn't even allow dissent on that.

00:05:24.980 That's right. If you look at the vote, and I looked it up, it was 277 to 1. And to her credit,

00:05:32.900 Cheryl Gallant actually voted against it. But included in the list of people who voted for it,

00:05:39.320 and this is relevant to today's discussion, not only was Andrew Scheer, and Erin O'Toole, of course,

00:05:45.220 but Pierre Paglia. Pierre Paglia voted in 2017 in support of reaffirmation of our agreement of the

00:05:54.360 Kyoto Protocol. And, you know, it's interesting because you look back at Andrew Scheer. As I say,

00:06:00.100 he voted against the Paris Agreement. They thought they were bringing somebody in to lead the party

00:06:04.820 who was going to continue that. And then he changed only a few weeks after becoming leader.

00:06:09.320 He actually, let's see here. He actually had a quarter billion dollar green tech and innovation

00:06:16.780 fund that he wanted to bring in. And it's interesting because, you know, they were ignoring

00:06:21.960 the grassroots even then. Because I looked up the polling at the time. Angus Reid did a polling at

00:06:27.580 about the same time that Andrew Scheer and the others, except for Cheryl Gallant, voted in support of

00:06:33.860 reaffirming the Paris Agreement. Angus Reid did a poll, and it showed that 68%, 68, more than two

00:06:41.980 thirds of core CPC supporters felt that the economic growth was more important than the environment.

00:06:49.320 So even then, they were betraying their base, you know, they were going against their base. And it's

00:06:54.960 quite interesting because, you know, then O'Toole came in, and he flip-flopped, you know, and that,

00:07:00.740 of course, was a major reason why he lost his position. So then you fast forward to today,

00:07:06.420 and what you find is that the current environment critic, his name's Kyle Seabach, he was on a

00:07:13.940 panel, actually, on CTV just the other night. And they were asking him, they asked him very specifically

00:07:20.480 this question. Does your party support pricing carbon as a way to achieve any reduction in carbon

00:07:28.160 emissions? Because carbon is not, it's a carbon dioxide. But that was the question from Evan

00:07:33.180 Solomon. And unfortunately, Mr. Seabach, he dodged the question completely. And he did exactly what

00:07:41.160 Patrick Brown did when I went to a town hall a few years ago with Patrick Brown. Patrick Brown, of course,

00:07:48.020 is running for the conservative leadership, and he was supporting a climate tax. He was supporting a carbon

00:07:54.220 tax at that time. So I went to the town hall, and I asked him in front of the audience, I said,

00:07:59.820 do you think that we are causing a dangerous climate crisis? He wouldn't answer. He dodged it,

00:08:06.460 he dodged. And I asked him again, and again, and again. And finally, I said in front of the audience,

00:08:11.660 you're saying you want a carbon tax, but you won't tell me if you think there's a climate emergency,

00:08:16.600 if there's any reason for it. And so he finally admitted, he said, I don't know. Now, to his credit,

00:08:24.300 it only took about 10 times asking. He finally, he finally admitted it. And to his credit, he was

00:08:30.160 being honest, he did not know. And yet, at the same time, he was promoting the climate tax, the carbon

00:08:36.140 tax. Yeah. And, you know, now, and of course, as leader of the Conservatives of Ontario, he was

00:08:43.860 actually a supporter of the price on carbon. Now, to his credit, what he's saying now, he hasn't said

00:08:49.460 a lot about climate change recently. But he's saying that Conservatives care about reducing

00:08:55.400 greenhouse gases. I don't. Do they really? Do they really? I don't. But to his credit, he actually said

00:09:04.320 that he would conduct a party-wide investigation and discussion to find out what Conservatives really

00:09:11.140 thought. Well, all he has to do is look to the last election to find out what they thought.

00:09:16.180 Because if you look at the most recent polls that I dug up and I sent to you, it's interesting because

00:09:21.960 it shows that while there's a lot of Conservatives in the Conservative Party of Canada, Grassroots,

00:09:27.480 who oppose the climate scare, who, you know, don't want to see it, there's quite a few who actually

00:09:32.060 support it. But among the People's Party of Canada, there's a huge number of people who obviously,

00:09:38.720 one of the reasons they moved over from Conservatives to the People's Party is because they oppose the

00:09:44.240 climate scare. So if they have any chance of getting those people back, they're going to have

00:09:49.840 to start saying what Maxime Bernier is saying, namely the climate scare is, well, he doesn't use the

00:09:55.060 same words as Stephen Harper, but a money-sucking socialist scheme would be actually pretty appropriate.

00:10:01.120 And when we look at the list of Conservative candidates, it's really sad because I went to Pierre

00:10:06.380 Polyev's presentation, his Axe the Tax, which was kind of like a World Wrestling Federation event,

00:10:13.000 you know, like they had rock music. And, you know, when he came into the auditorium,

00:10:19.000 he had a troop of people behind him and he was smacking hands and he was all excited and cheering

00:10:23.620 and everything. I thought it was completely corny, but the, I guess the faithful liked it. There was a

00:10:29.540 good 500 people there. But when it came to the climate issue, he said, where you want to axe the

00:10:35.960 tax, a prime minister with Pierre Polyev would have no carbon tax. We're going to have, then he talked

00:10:42.760 about technology for reducing carbon emissions, carbon dioxide emissions. He talked about, he

00:10:48.400 supported the carbon capture and sequestration. He wanted to get, yeah, which is just going to add a

00:10:55.080 huge expense and have no impact on climate. And probably with Canada being such a small emitter,

00:11:00.680 it won't have any impact on greenhouse gases. Trees capture my carbon, by the way.

00:11:05.440 Yeah. But he went further and he said, oh, and for those of you who, you know, he said,

00:11:11.120 we all like those electric vehicles and we're going to mine lithium in Canada. And then he went further

00:11:17.360 and said, and we're going to get developing countries to get off their coal, to reduce emissions,

00:11:23.400 to take clean Canadian natural gas. And of course he, he supports reducing emissions. So it's very sad.

00:11:30.740 He's doing the same thing. Charest is even worse. I mean, Charest is like wacko. When, when Canada

00:11:37.140 withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, you'd laugh to hear that then Premier Charest said, well, if Canada's

00:11:44.300 out of the protocol, Quebec is going to stay in it anyway, you know? So Charest hasn't released his

00:11:50.500 environment platform. It's coming out in May. But if you look at his, his actually, you know,

00:11:55.760 experience, his actual record, he had cap and trade for Quebec. He was always promoting the climate

00:12:01.480 scare. Less than Lewis, look at her. Less than Lewis hasn't said much about climate change recently

00:12:06.620 either. But as recently as 2019, she finished a PhD promoting the Paris Agreement, you know? So it's

00:12:15.120 pretty obvious where she's going to come out when she finally does release things. So you've got

00:12:19.400 Pierre Polyev supporting the climate scare indirectly, but talking about carbon sequestration

00:12:25.360 and reducing emissions and all that stuff. You got Charest, obviously he's going to support it.

00:12:31.100 Same thing with Less than Lewis. Same thing with Brown. The only one among the top five who is not yet

00:12:38.400 supporting the climate scare is Roman Babar. And I actually went to Babar. I actually went to his

00:12:44.840 event and I asked him, you know, I said, well, you know, conservatives want a leader who's going to

00:12:51.820 stand up to the climate scare. Would you stand up to it? Would you prevent a climate lockdown? And again,

00:12:58.100 he kind of dodged the question. He said, well, under a, you know, Prime Minister Babar administration,

00:13:05.000 there would be no lockdowns. And he talked about lockdowns being a bad thing and all that.

00:13:10.040 But he didn't actually say whether he supported the scare or not. And to his credit, he didn't talk

00:13:14.540 about using technology instead of tax, which of course was Andrew Scheer's best line. He didn't

00:13:21.800 talk about that. But, you know, I think that conservatives are not recognizing the fact that

00:13:27.100 they can actually oppose the climate scare and do it in a very thorough way without being

00:13:34.340 appearing as climate deniers. All they have to do is talk about the fact that climate change is

00:13:40.100 natural. It's happened all the time, you know, and human contribution, according to many scientists,

00:13:45.060 they don't have to say it themselves, because like Andrew, or I should say, Patrick Brown said,

00:13:52.280 they don't know they're not scientists themselves. So they should simply acknowledge that there are many

00:13:57.400 scientists in Clark at the University of Ottawa, Tim Patterson at Carleton University might have

00:14:02.380 Kandikar, former Environment Canada scientists, you know, many, many experts in the field say that the

00:14:09.280 climate scare is hugely exaggerated. So while they will protect the air, land and water, they're not

00:14:15.800 going to go along with the climate scare. And they could do that. Now, what I'm hearing, Sheila, you know,

00:14:21.560 over the years is that they say, well, the public support the climate scare. It depends on what public

00:14:26.640 you're talking about. Obviously, the People's Party that they're trying to get back to the Conservative

00:14:31.340 Party don't support it. But what they don't realize is that what drives public opinion more than

00:14:37.740 anything, is the statements of leaders. And, you know, they actually looked into the United States,

00:14:43.800 for example, and they found that when conservatives, in other words, the Republicans and Democrats

00:14:49.060 agreed on climate change, such as when John McCain was agreeing with the climate scare, the percent of

00:14:55.380 the population that wanted extreme action on climate change was much higher. When they actually had a

00:15:02.200 division between the Republicans and the Democrats, support for the climate scare went way down. So it's

00:15:08.980 a strategic mistake to think that you must follow public opinion. The truth is, the leaders of these

00:15:15.580 parties, to a large extent, influence and direct public opinion. So my point is that, as I said to Roman

00:15:23.660 Bob, we really need a conservative leader who will appeal to the grassroots, instead of doing what

00:15:30.180 Andrew Scheer did, instead of doing what Bob Mills did, instead of doing what Aaron O'Toole did, like,

00:15:35.260 learn a lesson. Yeah. The grassroots don't like it. So stop doing it. You know, it's, it's interesting,

00:15:44.700 because carbon pricing doesn't actually reduce carbon dioxide. It reduces your family's disposable

00:15:52.380 income. That's really what it does. But looking at this poll that you sent me, and it's a political

00:15:59.080 poll, 66% of people's party supporters either are not too concerned or not concerned at all. Actually,

00:16:07.720 not concerned at all is the greater one. They're not concerned at all about climate change. The number is

00:16:13.700 about 38%, 40% ish, of conservatives. Bloc Québécois, they are pretty close to the conservatives on this

00:16:24.620 issue. But when you look at the liberals, they're about 10%. The NDP, they're about 9%.

00:16:33.140 Wherein they are not concerned, don't care about climate change. Appealing to those people,

00:16:39.640 that's the way you win the next election. That's how you steal those votes from Justin Trudeau,

00:16:46.920 from Jagmeet Singh, is you say to those people, we don't care how you live your life. We want to keep

00:16:52.560 more of your money in your pocket. Everybody cares about inflation. That's a cross-partisan issue at

00:16:57.840 this point. And we also are not worried about climate change. We don't think it's something that

00:17:03.600 you need to lose your head over. You can bleed, well, according to this data, 9% right off the

00:17:09.540 liberals, right off the top. That's enough to win an election. Yeah, exactly. And even the question

00:17:14.720 wasn't well worded. I mean, it's not like, are you concerned about climate change? The real question

00:17:19.580 they should have asked is, do you think we are causing a climate emergency that's so serious,

00:17:25.820 we need to restructure at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, our entire energy infrastructure.

00:17:32.440 And I'll bet you anything that at least two thirds of conservatives would say, well, no. I mean,

00:17:38.340 and so I think the question is a leading question. People can be concerned about climate change,

00:17:45.380 because if it gets colder in Canada, for example, that's the most serious threat. I mean, there's 10

00:17:49.920 times as many people around the world killed due to cold than due to warming. So if somebody

00:17:55.640 asked me, are you concerned about climate change? I'd say, yeah, because I don't want to see global

00:18:00.040 cooling, which Dr. Tim Ball and quite a few experts are saying are coming, is coming. But I don't think

00:18:06.120 we're causing a climate crisis. Come on. And so if the poll was done properly, I'll bet you'd find that

00:18:12.580 the majority of conservatives did not want hundreds of billions of dollars spent on this sort of theory,

00:18:20.520 which isn't working, by the way, because of course, you know, it was supposed to be

00:18:24.840 much warmer today than it than it has been, you know, in previous years, according to the computer

00:18:31.500 models. And yet they're using those models to forecast the future. And, you know, of course,

00:18:37.340 they want to get off natural gas, too. This is the other thing that people don't realize.

00:18:42.080 It sort of reminds me of that pastor in Nazi Germany who said, you know, first they came for

00:18:47.500 the Jews, but I wasn't Jewish, so I didn't speak out, etc. Well, you know, the natural gas people at

00:18:53.000 one point were promoting the end of coal, because they saw a great opportunity. But of course, now

00:18:59.120 what's happening is now that coal is being phased out. Now the envirals want to get rid of natural

00:19:04.100 gas. Yep. And we're seeing that all down the line. So there's strategic mistakes being made by the

00:19:09.960 political class, by the industries. I mean, the industries, to a large extent, are the greatest

00:19:15.220 supporters of the climate scare. You know, you'd laugh, Sheila, the person in the world who I've heard

00:19:22.040 that is the most outspoken in support of the climate scare is not Al Gore, not David Suzuki.

00:19:29.040 It is the head, the previous head, Rich, his name is, of the World Nuclear Association.

00:19:34.820 Yeah, I bet.

00:19:37.480 Out of the UK, they've said statements that are just incredible. I mean, they say not millions,

00:19:42.620 but billions of people on all continents will be damaged and die and, you know, be affected

00:19:47.540 by this terrible thing. So by our nuclear reactors. But what they don't realize, again,

00:19:53.140 is that they are helping the enemy because the environmentalists hate nuclear power even more

00:19:58.500 than they hate fossil fuels. So once again, you have these strategic mistakes being made.

00:20:04.380 And we've written to the World Nuclear Association and say, look, you know, this is just going to

00:20:09.180 lessen the credibility of your organization and the whole nuclear industry when the climate scare

00:20:15.720 finally collapses. And it will. It will eventually collapse. I mean, if you look at Ottawa, I have

00:20:21.060 people in British Columbia, friends in British Columbia, who say they hope the city of Ottawa

00:20:25.900 goes ahead with its $60 billion climate plan, because then thousands of Ottowans will die

00:20:32.920 at minus 30 and they won't do it here. So, I mean, I hope it's in Ottawa. I hope they don't do it.

00:20:40.680 Me too. Yeah. You know, Jay Lair, who's our, really our chief scientist, wonderful fellow, 85 years old,

00:20:48.800 an ex Ironman triathlon guy. He still swims for miles and bikes. Oh, today I was lazy. I only biked

00:20:56.260 30 miles. You know, he's an incredible guy. But I mean, he thinks that we're going to have to have

00:21:01.780 what happened in Texas in February of last year happen all over the Western world before people are

00:21:09.260 going to wake up. And just to refresh people's memory in Texas, what happened is a little before

00:21:14.760 that deep freeze hit Texas. And it wasn't a record. It was cold, but it wasn't a record. It was like

00:21:20.240 minus six, that sort of thing. Cold for Texas, for sure. And what happened is that a little before that,

00:21:27.060 Texas was getting 58% of its electricity from wind power and the wind died. And so suddenly natural gas

00:21:36.200 had to compensate not only for the extreme cold, but it had to compensate for 58% of all the

00:21:42.000 electricity that was previously supplied by wind. And of course, what was the result? The result was

00:21:48.320 they had massive blackouts that came within minutes of the entire system collapsing. And the Wall Street

00:21:54.940 Journal reported later that not only were tens of billions of dollars lost, but 700 people died.

00:22:01.980 700 due to hypoxia, you know, in their car because of, you know, keeping their car running all night,

00:22:09.480 they were, they were freezing to death in their house. And, you know, one boy, for example, froze to

00:22:14.760 death in his sleep. And sadly, Jay Lear thinks that this is the kind of thing that will have to happen

00:22:21.200 over and over and over and over before the bulk of the population wake up. And I think that this is the

00:22:27.900 kind of message that Pierre Polyev and that, you know, Patrick Brown and Les and Lewis, all of them

00:22:34.180 should be saying, hey, look what happens when you really do make a transition to renewable energy.

00:22:41.520 And just to give you a cost figure here, it was kind of amazing. Stephen Gabow was on CTV with again,

00:22:48.820 with Evan Solomon, my favorite. And on April 3, Stephen Gabow, the environment and climate change

00:22:56.280 minister, he said that since 2015, the feds have spent something around $110 billion on the energy

00:23:05.820 transition. Now, $110 billion on a transition to craziness, you know, and yet, and yet, we still

00:23:15.400 have the conservatives essentially defending this transition. And, you know, to me, Sheila, there's an

00:23:21.880 analogy I'd like to use. It's like you've been falsely accused of murder. And just before the trial, your

00:23:29.040 judge comes to your lawyer comes to you, and he says, you know, I think you'd get a lesser sentence, if you

00:23:35.440 pleaded guilty, but asked for the mercy of the court. Well, I think you fired your lawyer. Yeah. And that's

00:23:43.740 exactly what many conservative supporters are doing. They're firing the Conservative Party of Canada, because

00:23:50.100 they are admitting that we are committing this murder, that we are ruining the planet with our carbon

00:23:55.520 dioxide. And so what are they doing? They're firing the Conservative Party, and they're moving to Maxime

00:24:00.860 Bernier, and the People's Party. And as you and I discussed in a previous interview, had they got the

00:24:08.520 People's Party votes, they would now be government. Yeah. And that's something that they just aren't

00:24:16.060 learning. I mean, why on earth is Pierre Polyev supporting the climate scare, just as he did in

00:24:21.360 2017, when he voted in support to reaffirm the Paris Agreement? You know, why is Patrick Brown still

00:24:28.540 doing it, even though he admits that, well, I don't really know. Unless in Lewis, I imagine she'll do it,

00:24:35.600 Sheree will do it. I'm hopeful that Roman Babar will actually say what's real. And, you know,

00:24:42.160 they don't have to come across as anti-environmental. They simply have to say, let's protect the things

00:24:47.160 that are real. Air, landing, water pollution, species at risk, that kind of thing. Yeah, I'm pro-tree,

00:24:54.060 anti-tax. And it's funny that, you know, you mentioned that, I think it was an Andrew Shere quote,

00:25:01.940 technology instead of taxation. That's exactly what unfolded in Texas, where they incentivized

00:25:08.940 green technology through tax structure, giving subsidies and tax breaks for you to put up wind

00:25:15.520 turbines that are unreliable. And then they had an over-representation of that on the grid,

00:25:21.840 and it cost people their lives when you needed the grid. It's, you know, you need the grid

00:25:27.000 in times of catastrophe. It's the same thing as you need your civil liberties in times of tyranny.

00:25:33.320 Same thing with green energy. You need green energy when, or you need reliable energy when things go bad.

00:25:38.360 And it wasn't there. And people died. That's right. They died. And, you know,

00:25:42.240 the sad thing is they say, oh, the natural gas failed. Well, two reasons. One is because the

00:25:47.100 demand on natural gas was sudden and extreme. But the other thing, Sheila, and this will make your

00:25:52.320 viewers really laugh, sadly, ironically, in an effort to please the green movement, they justified

00:25:59.520 having a lot of gas, natural gas, by saying that they would run the pumps and the other valves and the

00:26:06.920 other things that were used to control the natural gas pipelines. They would run it with renewable

00:26:12.260 energy, with wind power. Yay! We're going to run on that. So what happened when the wind died is they

00:26:19.540 couldn't actually use all their natural gas lines. Yep. Because they were running them with wind power.

00:26:25.800 I mean, talk about insane. You've got a natural gas pipeline full of the fuel. Why don't you use that

00:26:31.260 fuel to run the pipeline? But instead, they used to win. You know, so I mean, it's completely crazy.

00:26:38.180 And the conservatives simply are not leading. You know, I think that for someone like Roman Babar,

00:26:44.340 who's admittedly, you know, a bit of a, you know, his chances of winning are not that strong.

00:26:49.600 But imagine if he seeing a completely wide open lane for leading the party to to actually question the

00:26:58.680 climate scare and to show that a lot of it doesn't make sense. I mean, imagine if he were to say, I

00:27:04.580 would kill not only the carbon tax, I would kill the whole climate scare. It's not technology to solve

00:27:10.300 this problem because the problem doesn't exist. Right. You know, I would love to see him say that.

00:27:15.460 And he could pull in support from all across the party. I haven't seen any recent polls as to how

00:27:21.600 many of the parties support economy over environment. But back, you know, in 2017, when

00:27:27.860 Andrew Scheer was trying to solve the climate crisis, more than two thirds of the grassroots

00:27:33.080 opposed it. So, you know, I know he lost his position for other reasons as well. You know,

00:27:39.560 there was a controversy about his child's education and where they were getting the money. But at the same

00:27:44.420 time, I'm sure that must have played a big role. And of course, in the case of O'Toole,

00:27:49.340 his sabotaging the base, that played a huge role in him losing his leadership position. So why are

00:27:56.040 these candidates? Oh, you'd laugh. Here's you'll think this is a joke. Who would you say, aside from

00:28:01.580 Aaron O'Toole, would be the worst person for Pierre Polyev to bring in to introduce him to the big rally on

00:28:08.520 Thursday night? Was it Doug Ford? No, it was Andrew Scheer. No. So here we have a guy who failed, who betrayed the

00:28:19.360 base, who's now introducing a candidate who's supposedly appealing to the base. So I mean,

00:28:26.020 I thought, oh, man, what is he doing? He's showing that he's going to be a carbon copy to some extent

00:28:33.060 of Andrew Scheer. And they already got rid of Andrew. What are they doing? It's so dumb.

00:28:40.960 These conservatives just love to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory at every opportunity,

00:28:46.860 don't they? Now, I wanted to ask you about another thing that's in the news. And people keep telling me

00:28:53.840 that maybe I talk about this too much, but Keystone XL and Russian oil and gas, Keystone XL would

00:29:01.020 absolutely offset Russian oil and gas imports, and then some. And it's interesting to note because

00:29:08.960 you mentioned the nuclear energy movement, the nuclear energy lobby, which I like nuclear. I like

00:29:17.040 it. It's just that they don't need to buy into the climate scare to sell their good ideas. They don't

00:29:22.420 need to concede that ground. But there was some research done that showed that Russia was funding

00:29:31.580 through the back door, through offshore accounts, the green energy and green, you know, the climate

00:29:38.760 scare people, the big foundations, the environmentalist foundations in San Francisco, they were funding that

00:29:44.100 through offshore accounts to whip up opposition to American and Canadian pipelines and fracking.

00:29:50.820 Why? Not because Putin cares about green energy, but because it protected Gazprom's market share, which at the

00:29:58.500 end of the day, is funding Putin's war on Ukraine. And it's funny to see the same people who say, I care about

00:30:05.500 climate change, with also a Ukrainian flag in their Twitter bios. And they can't realize that one is harming the

00:30:16.140 other. They just can't put that connection together. Yeah. In fact, it's interesting. I love Rex Murphy. I think

00:30:23.400 he does lots of writing. He's now writing for the Epoch Times, which is wonderful, actually. And I've

00:30:29.380 subscribed to them. They're great. But he wrote an article just a couple of weeks ago saying that the

00:30:35.040 green movement have a lot to account for, with their support of effectively supporting tyrants around the

00:30:42.640 world. Because, you know, you look at Biden, in place of the Keystone XL pipeline, you know, very clean energy

00:30:49.500 coming from Canada in the most efficient and environmentally friendly way. He's now negotiating with Venezuela. He's

00:30:56.940 negotiating more with the Saudis, with the Saudis, with Iran. Okay, so I mean, it's pretty ridiculous. I think that what's

00:31:04.840 happening here, Sheila, is the environmental movement can kill Canadian and American oil. They can

00:31:11.980 succeed. They can't kill Russian oil. They can't kill Iranian oil. Imagine if you're in Iran, and you're going

00:31:17.640 out protesting against Iranian oil. I don't think you'd last for very long. I mean, you'd be in a gulag if you

00:31:24.380 weren't dead. So I think that what the environment movement does is they say, well, we can kill Canadian

00:31:30.480 oil. And of course, in the case of the Keystone, they had pressure on both sides of the border. And

00:31:35.320 they identified it as a symbol of the climate movement. In fact, the CDC even admitted that

00:31:41.060 Keystone by itself wouldn't have any effect on climate, without almost no effect on emissions,

00:31:46.420 but that it was a symbol of the climate catastrophe coming. And if the Biden administration wasn't

00:31:52.420 serious about that, then they're not serious about climate change. And it is interesting in both Obama

00:31:57.520 and Biden's cancelling of the pipeline. The main issue they named was that the United States had

00:32:04.420 to appear to be leading the world to set an example to the world on the fight against climate change,

00:32:10.940 and Keystone was the way to do it. So, you know, but Alison Redford, when she went to Washington,

00:32:17.420 DC, campaigning for the pipeline, she promoted the climate scare over and over and over. And Jason

00:32:25.020 Kenney indirectly promotes the climate scare. They actually say the right things about the economic

00:32:31.060 impact and the fact that it's less greenhouse gases, etc. But if the pipeline is not about

00:32:38.140 the actual climate impact or the actual greenhouse gases, but it's a symbol, then you have to fight

00:32:44.860 the symbol. If you let them get away with the symbol being, we're saving the planet for future

00:32:51.160 children. And the pipeline is our, our first target, because of course, the enviros don't want to just

00:32:56.860 kill Keystone, they want to kill every pipeline, they want to stop all shipments, etc. And they're

00:33:01.020 working against trains right now, for example. So, I mean, you don't defeat a symbol by not fighting

00:33:08.060 the symbol. And, you know, it's the same thing in the conservative leadership campaign. It really is,

00:33:15.100 like I said, in my Real Clear Energy article, death by 1000 cuts. Yep. And it's going to continue to

00:33:20.860 kill, kill, kill industries, jobs, massive tax benefits that we would otherwise have. It's going

00:33:28.340 to continue to kill all these things until we kill the climate scare. And as long as conservatives are not

00:33:36.480 prepared to really attack the symbol, then they're going to lose. You know, it's interesting, I sent

00:33:41.280 Pierre Polyev's comments to a PhD in physics, friend of mine, who's a strong conservative.

00:33:46.860 And I said, what do you think of this? He said, vote people's party. Like he, that was all he said in

00:33:53.920 his answer. Because what's happening is they will lose and lose and lose more and more people who

00:34:01.500 understand like this PhD in physics, that the climate scare is wrong, because they're not prepared to fight

00:34:07.460 the symbol. And Keystone was a casualty of the conservative approach. And, and it's very sad, because,

00:34:15.820 you know, there's a saying in the book, and I really encourage readers or viewers to look up this book

00:34:21.420 on Amazon, or wherever you want to look at. It's called Rules for Radical Conservatives. And it's the

00:34:28.380 author, it's a pen name, but the author is David Kahane, K-A-H-A-N, I believe. And he writes the book, as if he

00:34:36.520 were a left winger, telling conservatives, how they beat us, how they marched through the institutions,

00:34:43.680 how they took over our schools. It's like the screw tape letters, but for conservatives.

00:34:48.480 Right. So he's telling us, you dumb conservatives, here's how we beat you. Okay. And he has a statement

00:34:56.160 in there, which is a beautiful quote, I can't remember the exact wording, but he says, a good general

00:35:01.080 never fights a battle on his enemy's terrain, or using his enemy's methods or under the enemy's

00:35:08.500 terms. Because, of course, they'll lose. And that's exactly what the conservatives do. They accept

00:35:14.800 the symbol, the, the terrible climate catastrophe that's coming. I mean, Ed Fast, for example, who was

00:35:21.480 the environment critic under Rona Ambrose and Andrew Scheer, he said that his colleagues

00:35:27.360 unreservably supported the Paris Agreement, but injected to the liberals approach as to how they're

00:35:34.220 going to fill it. So the conservatives are doing this over and over and over, and they just miss it.

00:35:41.180 They, they're losing people and they're going to, I wouldn't be surprised if Maxime Bernier gets,

00:35:46.100 oh, 25% or more of the conservative vote, if the next leader of the conservative party

00:35:52.360 still supports the climate scare. Because people like my friend, my PhD friend, they say,

00:35:58.780 well, why would I vote for a party that supports this nonsense that's ruining the country, destroying

00:36:03.780 jobs and costing us a fortune. So I guess don't get it. They say that Pierre Polyev is going to be the

00:36:10.200 next prime minister. Well, why do we elect someone like that? We elect them because we want to change

00:36:16.640 what's going on in Canada. And he is certainly talking about change in a lot of areas. And that's

00:36:21.340 really great. But for people who care about the climate scare, people who work in the energy

00:36:26.020 industry and others knowing how important energy is to us, there wouldn't be any change. In fact,

00:36:31.620 with a previous conservative plan, which was going to be regulations instead of carbon tax,

00:36:36.740 various, yeah, well, various economists showed that that would be more expensive. Yeah. You know,

00:36:42.480 so sure, we can replace Justin Trudeau with a conservative leader. But if they're still supporting

00:36:47.260 the climate scare, like, what's the point? Yeah, you know, and it's interesting, because

00:36:53.920 an unhealthy economy, a bad economy, usually, if you care about those sorts of things, and I don't,

00:37:01.520 and I'm pretty sure you don't, emissions go up, things get dirtier and filthier, you look at third

00:37:07.940 world cities compared to first world cities. And so when you look at, you know, economic strife,

00:37:15.140 it's dirty, you want a prosperous economy, it makes for a cleaner environment. And Trump,

00:37:22.160 he let fracking just happen pretty much everywhere. And what happened in the United States,

00:37:27.700 again, if you care about those sorts of things, emissions went down.

00:37:32.040 Yeah, yeah, exactly. And you know, it's interesting, because for people who really care about the

00:37:38.100 environment, they should be very concerned about the climate scare, because the climate activists

00:37:42.140 have hijacked the environmental movement. I mean, we got Earth Day coming up on the 22nd of April.

00:37:47.680 Do we? Darn it. What are we going to do, Tom? I'll dress as a tree.

00:37:52.340 Right. But you know, Earth Day, when it started in 1970 was about real environmental concerns.

00:37:58.400 Except for the founder composted his girlfriend. We cannot forget that.

00:38:01.940 That's true. That's not a great, great thing. He did. But the environmental movement really has to

00:38:08.760 kick the climate people off the stage, because they have hijacked a friend who works in water on the

00:38:20.540 other side of the river in Quebec. And he said that as the climate scare funding goes up, the funding for

00:38:26.660 water resources, you know, water pollution and things like that abatement has gone down. Because

00:38:32.980 there's only a limited amount of money the government's going to pour into environment. I mean, it's

00:38:36.540 important to focus on real issues. Because if climate change absorbs the massive, the biggest amount of

00:38:43.540 environmental funding, then you don't have funding to clean up the Ottawa River, which is filthy, by the

00:38:48.800 way, and it flows right by the Parliament buildings, they can't clean that up. But they're gonna,

00:38:52.200 you know, they're gonna stop climate change in the year 2500. It's pretty silly. So what the

00:38:59.380 conservatives need to do is to pick examples like that. Indians on or native people on reserves,

00:39:05.900 they don't have fresh drinking water, we have to focus on the water resources issue and really solve

00:39:12.220 it. I mean, it's a real disgrace that in Canada, our native people in many reserves don't have proper

00:39:18.140 drinking water. And imagine what you could do. Like, as I say, 110 billion dollars is what Gibbo

00:39:24.920 cited on CTV News, as to what the feds have spent on the so called energy transition, energy transition

00:39:33.060 to suicide, you know, like, imagine if even a tiny fraction of that went to help the native communities

00:39:40.660 or went to clean up the Ottawa River. I mean, we can have a much more superior economy, environment,

00:39:46.220 everything, if they would simply get off this stupid climate change thing. And you know, the big

00:39:52.840 threat, of course, and we should adapt to climate change is cooling. Because you might remember Tim

00:39:58.660 Ball, Dr. Ball, who was our lead scientist. He also frequently talked about the fact that the sun is

00:40:05.080 going into a grand solar minimum by around 2060. And that's when we could see conditions as cold as it

00:40:12.140 was a few centuries ago, when the Thames River in London froze three, yeah, three meters, was it three?

00:40:20.100 It was a meter thick. That's right. It was a meter thick, three feet thick. Now, of course, it never

00:40:25.380 freezes. They even had oxen in frost fairs on the Thames River. And Tim, of course, he was a, he is,

00:40:32.160 he's still around. He's a historical climatologist. And he shows how throughout those cold periods of the

00:40:38.580 little ice age, we had crop failure, we had extreme weather, we had the really bad things that

00:40:44.100 they're saying now will happen with warming, but they got it upside down. It's cooling that causes

00:40:49.340 these problems, not warming. So yes, we should adapt to climate change. And that should be the

00:40:54.140 focus. We should continue to work on alternative energy. But to try to replace like with all EVs,

00:41:01.100 you know, they want to have what is it 100% is it of new sales by 2035, 2035. By 2050. Yeah,

00:41:09.940 they want to have 20% by 2026. It's going to be a challenge. 60% by 2030 100% by 2050 electric

00:41:18.160 vehicles. So what does Pierre say? He says, we're going to mine lithium in Canada. So you can get those

00:41:23.720 great electric vehicles. No, Pierre, we don't want electric vehicles that don't work properly in the

00:41:29.220 winter, that involve in the supply chain, you know, all sorts of human rights and environmental

00:41:34.480 abuses, which he is focused on, which is a good thing. But who in their right mind wants an electric

00:41:40.420 snowplow? You know, I mean, you want a big powerful truck to push right through that snow. So what was

00:41:47.940 the combination of going to weak energy sources, the potential for coming cooling, we're setting up a

00:41:56.020 potential real disaster for Canada's children, quite frankly, you know, I'm glad you brought up

00:42:01.660 the topic of clean water on indigenous reserves, because it does tie back into this blocking of

00:42:09.080 Canadian resource development. Because in Alberta, if I had to pick one single industry,

00:42:16.960 that I would describe as indigenous, I would say it's the oil patch. It people from indigenous

00:42:24.840 communities are employed in mining and oil and gas, they're in trucking related to mining and oil

00:42:31.420 and gas, the work sites are in indigenous communities are close by indigenous communities.

00:42:38.040 So this allows indigenous youth to stay in their own community, but also get out of generational

00:42:42.760 poverty. And when you take those jobs away, you damn entire communities to never having a way to get

00:42:50.340 out. And if you look at prosperous reserves, where there is industry and jobs around them,

00:42:57.380 the reserves are clean and happy, just like a normal community. But when it's depressed through

00:43:04.180 economic strife, lack of jobs, it looks like Attawapiskat. Yeah. And so if you care about

00:43:11.060 Canada's indigenous communities, if you want them to have clean drinking water, get out of the way of

00:43:16.020 fossil fuel development, those are the jobs that are closest to indigenous communities.

00:43:20.500 Yes, exactly. And there's another sector in the population that are being ignored.

00:43:24.500 And that is the homeless. Yeah, you know, it's interesting, I have a friend who works in death

00:43:28.880 and dying. And she looks at all the statistics during the pandemic. And she shows a huge increase

00:43:34.300 in suicides among young people. But she's also seeing a big increase in like in Ottawa, for example,

00:43:40.620 we're seeing homeless people dying in the cold, and they find them frozen to death with a bottle of

00:43:46.980 booze beside them. And yet the city of Ottawa can't afford enough support for those people. But they can

00:43:53.340 afford $60 billion for climate change. Sickening. You know, like, like, we really have our priorities

00:44:00.260 upside down. You know, when I was working in the House of Commons, one thing I noticed is the groups

00:44:04.920 that the parliamentarians take most seriously, are those who apply the most pressure, people who get

00:44:10.840 out and protest. And I guess there aren't people out protesting for homeless. You know, it's the same

00:44:15.260 thing with our nursing homes, our nursing homes, both my parents lived in them for a short while

00:44:20.120 before they passed away. Our nursing homes are massively underfunded. So these are real concerns. And

00:44:26.880 they're actually not right wing concerns. They're just sensible concerns. And a conservative leader could

00:44:32.960 say, No, we're not going to spend it on this fictitious idea that we control the climate in a

00:44:38.560 century, we're going to work on native reserves, we're going to work on getting them jobs and keeping

00:44:44.200 their jobs like in the fossil fuel sector, we're going to work on homeless problem, we're going to

00:44:49.200 work on, you know, all these other real issues that require money and require help and support. And I

00:44:56.880 would think that would come across as a much more compassionate government than this constant focus on

00:45:02.360 climate climate climate climate. Yeah, it's, I think it's great hubris to think that we can change

00:45:09.220 the weather before we could help the homeless person in front of us. Tom, I could talk to you all

00:45:14.600 day. But you're busy, and I'm busy. Tom, tell us how people find the work that you do, including your

00:45:22.500 podcast, do not forget to plug your podcast, and how they can support the work that you do. Because

00:45:27.000 you guys are a mom and pop shop over there. And you don't take any of, you know, Russian money

00:45:34.100 through offshore accounts, or government money. You're really, you're up against the green movement

00:45:41.020 with their Russian funds, and you don't have any of that. Yeah, that's right. Well, people can go to

00:45:46.040 our website, icsc-canada.com. And in the upper right hand corner, you put your email address in

00:45:52.800 and click, keep me up to date. And we will, we're just about to send to the city of Ottawa, for

00:45:58.880 example, an opposition to them signing the fossil fuel non proliferation treaty, which, of course,

00:46:06.260 is a new treaty that is just being pushed on the city, Vancouver, treating it like nuclear weapons.

00:46:11.300 Well, exactly. They're saying it is the nuclear weapons of the 21st century, and we have to stop

00:46:16.520 it. We're actually pushing them against the, not only their ridiculous green plan, but also they

00:46:23.700 want to not have a replacement to a major natural gas pipeline in Ottawa, because we're not going to

00:46:30.640 need any natural gas, they say. I mean, this makes no sense at all. You know, we're going to power the

00:46:36.260 city with renewable energy. So we're opposing that. And, you know, our report is there right

00:46:42.860 on the homepage, icsc-canada.com, which is a cautionary tale to governments around the world,

00:46:49.660 what happens if you let the environmental movement take over, the climate change movement in particular

00:46:55.500 take over, they will drive you to absolute destruction. I mean, they really will. And we're

00:47:01.920 going to see Texas's all over Canada, all over the world, you know, the 700 dead due to wind power,

00:47:07.820 et cetera. And the podcast, if you go up resources on the homepage, you need to scroll down, you can find

00:47:14.800 the podcast where I actually interviewed you as well. So yeah, and we also very much welcome donations

00:47:21.440 because, you know, we're working hard to try to convince the politicians, especially on the

00:47:26.580 conservative side, that there are huge gains to be made. If you become a climate realist,

00:47:33.480 if you actually represent the grassroots, the way they want to be represented. So we're fighting that

00:47:39.840 very, very hard in Canada. You're one of the few people who is openly doing that and saying what

00:47:46.060 normal conservatives think out loud. I think normal conservatives, they tell this to pollsters,

00:47:52.720 sometimes not all the times, but I think generally people don't care about climate change. They know

00:47:58.320 the TV tells them they're supposed to care about climate change, but they don't actually care.

00:48:02.280 They go outside, they look at the weather. Do I need to put a coat on? Do I need to wear rain boots?

00:48:06.560 That's insofar as how much they care about the weather. At least that's how I feel.

00:48:10.760 That's right. They care more about the future of the country and their job and their children

00:48:14.580 and the poor people and the native people. They care about that. Not about this crazy idea that we are

00:48:21.080 the master controls of the climate. Tom, I want to thank you so much for taking the time to come

00:48:26.900 on the show today and for your incredible research and work into these topics. Like I said, you are

00:48:32.860 really one of just a handful of people talking about these issues, but they are issues that affect

00:48:37.740 every single Canadian and climate policy makes you poorer and takes your job away. And I think we

00:48:44.420 should all care about that. That's for sure. Thank you, Sheila. Thanks, Tom.

00:48:51.080 Well, this is the second week where we're testing out a new letters portion of the show. Unlike the CBC,

00:49:01.480 we want to hear from you. So instead of just my usual sign off where I give my final thoughts,

00:49:07.900 I want to hear your thoughts. Our first letter is from Catalin Radulescu. That sounds like a Romanian

00:49:16.960 last name. I'm sure you have a lot to say about communism. Catalin, let's read through some of

00:49:23.000 this together. Hello, Sheila. Big fan of your work. Well, that's nice. Thank you for all your efforts

00:49:29.320 to offer a different perspective than what the media party, to use a term from the old communist

00:49:33.800 countries, parrots. And thanks to the entire Rebel News team for their fight against propaganda and

00:49:38.320 tyranny. That said, I keep thinking of how we could do a better job to push back against the system.

00:49:42.760 Mr. Peckford, having sued the federal government for their unscientific air travel ban for the

00:49:49.340 unvaccinated, is one of not too many examples so far. It may be difficult to broadly push against

00:49:55.800 the government. A better strategy may be picking them one by one. Dr. Tam is a very good first target.

00:50:02.760 In the United States, medical errors and malpractice are among the top 10 leading causes of death.

00:50:08.980 It's estimated that over 250,000 people die annually because of medical errors, incompetence,

00:50:15.740 and fraud. Every year, there are tens of thousands of malpractice cases. I am using United States

00:50:22.840 numbers because they are more transparent with their data and more stats are available than in Canada.

00:50:29.080 I know that some good doctors wrote warning letters to the government and tried to get the medical

00:50:33.900 robots of the government to participate in a dialogue for identifying the best solutions for

00:50:39.480 the country. They have been totally ignored so far, and some even lost their licenses and jobs.

00:50:45.760 That tells me that those vaccines have nothing to do with the health of the population.

00:50:50.560 Dr. Tam is giving the government some sort of appearance that science is behind all their policies.

00:50:55.280 If Dr. Tam has proven that she is wrong, then perhaps the confused folks may wake up from their

00:51:02.200 sleepwalking and realize that they have been misled. Like that enlightening moment when the kid yells at

00:51:08.020 the emperor is actually naked, and then suddenly the crowd starts to see that. We really need to make

00:51:13.600 all the possible efforts to fight against this. I was born in a communist country. I spent the first half

00:51:19.660 of my life living the communist nightmare, and the second half experiencing the liberty and human

00:51:24.360 dignity in Canada. What I see now happening in our country, it very deeply concerns me. It is like a

00:51:30.740 nightmare coming back. Some things are even worse than what I experienced in my early life. I could give

00:51:36.280 you some revealing stories from the communist times if you'd ever think that may be of interest for

00:51:41.620 your listeners. If people of Canada knew how good of a life they're still having, they would wake up and

00:51:47.440 fight for what the generations before them fought for and even gave their lives for to ensure a good

00:51:52.900 future for their children and grandchildren. Thank you again, Sheila. Good luck with your work and all

00:51:57.520 the best. Catalan Radolescu. I'm guessing you're from Romania. I should tell you that this past week,

00:52:05.400 at least for the first three days of the week, I have been live tweeting court because two churches

00:52:12.640 and some private individuals are suing the Alberta government for a violation of their charter rights

00:52:19.060 through lockdowns. And our chief medical officer of health, Dina Hinshaw, has been on the stand.

00:52:25.980 And it has been really something to listen to her justify literally destroying lives. At Rebel News,

00:52:33.640 we have been in the pressure cooker of telling these stories for the past two years.

00:52:37.360 I've listened to Dina Hinshaw justify it by saying that they were trying to protect the health care

00:52:47.400 system so that other people could use it if they needed it. The health care system does not have

00:52:53.640 rights. People do. And it is the government's job to protect those rights, not take them away,

00:53:00.960 especially in times of tyranny. That's when the government restraining itself from stomping

00:53:07.200 on your civil liberties matters the most. Well, everybody, that's the show for tonight.

00:53:12.000 What a great letter. Thank you so much for tuning in. If you'd like to have your letter read on the

00:53:16.680 show, I sort of picked them at random. I'm not, you know, screening them for quality. Send me an email

00:53:22.460 at Sheila at rebelnews.com. Put gun show letters in the subject line. It'll land in my email box and I'll

00:53:31.060 just pick it. It could be you next week on the show. Thanks so much for tuning in. Thank you to

00:53:37.140 everybody in studio in Toronto for putting the show together. I'll see everybody back here at the

00:53:42.800 same time in the same place next week. And remember, don't let the government tell you that you had too

00:53:47.020 much to think.

Rebel News Podcast - April 07, 2022

SHEILA GUNN REID ｜ How long until the Conservative Party leadership candidates flip-flop on climate policy？

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript